BIKRAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated August 31, 1977 of Special Judge for A. C. D. Cases, Rajasthan, Jaipur in Special Criminal Case No- 27/76 convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 161 IPC and Section 5 (l) (a) (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (in short, 'i. P. C. Act') to one year simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-under each court (in default of payment of fine to farther undergo one month S. I. ). The sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) IN brief, the prosecution case can be narrated at the relevant time the appellant was a Patwari and was posted in the area Jagatsingh Walla, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar. The complainant, Jagir Singh (P. W. 4), was allotted agricultural land in Chak No. 33 M. L. bearing Morabba No. 56, measuring. . . . . . . . Killa for temporary cultivation. His application for permanent allotment of the said land was dismissed by the Additional Collector, Sri Ganga-nagar on August 23, 1975. The Addl. Collector had dismissed the application on the basis of a report made by the accused appellant to the effect that the complainant was not a landless person. IN the evening of 1. 10. 75, the complainant submitted an application (Exhibit P. 11" to P. W. 7 Babulai Sharma, Additional S. P. , Anti Corruption Department, Sriganganagar. IN the said application it was stated by the complainant that he was having temporary allotment of agricultural land in Chak No. 33-M. L. and on his application for permanent allotment of the said land, an appeal was pending before the Commissioner, Bikaner. IN the said appeal he needed a verification from the concerned Patwari of his being landless person. It was also stated in the said application that he approched to the Tehsildar Raisinghnagar and moved an application seeking verification that he was holding no other land except the land allotted to him for temporary cultivation. The said application was forwarded to the Patwari of the area vide order of the Tehsildar dated 27. 9. 75. The application is Exhibit P. 10. on the record. It was further stated that he (complainant) went to the appellant, who was the Patwari of the area, with the said application, but he demanded Rs. 100/- for its verification, which he do not want to give.

(3.) IN cross-examination this witness admitted that some other persons were also sitting on the cot of the accused when they reached there. He further stated that the accused had given an explanation to the Additional S. P. , when he was asked by him, that Jagir Singh had returned the amount of loan which was borrowed by him. This witness also stated that at the time, when the explanation was given, Jagir Singh complainant did not refute this fact and remained silent.